06 THE KRTTIKAS

Contents

• Nakṣatras in old Vedic times generally mean asterisms and not zodiacal portions
• The present and the older position of the solstices.
• In later works
  • in Vedānga Jyotiṣa -An objection against its antiquity examined
  • Passages in the Taittirīya Saṁhitā and Brāhamaṇa
• The Kr̥ttikās head the Nakṣatras
• Deva and Yama Nakṣatras. Their real meaning
• Taittirīya Saṁhitā vii. 4, 8. discussed.
  • Jaimini’s and Shabara’s interpretation of the same
• Conclusions deducible therefrom -Winter solstice in Māgha
  • Vernal equinox in the Kr̥ttikas
  • The age of the saṁhitā - 2350 B, C.
  • Bentley’s arguments and views criticised.

Nakṣatras as asterisms

WE HAVE seen that the ancient Aryas originally commenced their year, which was luni-solar and sidereal, with the vernal equinox, and that when the beginning was changed to the winter solstice both the reckonings were kept up, the one for sacrificial and the other for civil purposes. Let us now examine if there is any reliable evidence to show that the Vedic priests made any corrections in the calendar when by the precession of the equinoxes the cycle of seasons gradually fell back. All our present calendars are prepared on the supposition that the vernal equinox still coincides with the end of Revati and our equmeration of the Nakshatras begins with Ashvini, though the equinox has now receded about 18° from Revatī. It has been shown by Prof. Whitney (Sūrya Siddhānta, viii., 9 note, p. 311) that the above position of the vernal equinox may be assumed to be true at about 490 A. D. Taking this as the probable date of the introduction of the present system, we have now to see if we can trace back the position of the vernal equinox amongst the fixed circle of stars. The question, so far, as one antecedent stage is concerned, has been thoroughly discussed by Colebrooke, Bentley, Max Mūller, Weber, Whitney, Biot, and other scholars : and I shall therefore only summarise what they have said, noting the points where I differ from them.

I do not propose to enter into any detailed mathematical calculations at this stage of the inquiry, for I am of opinion that until we have thoroughly examined and discussed all the passages in the Vedic works bearing on this question, and settled and arranged our facts, it is useless to go into minute numerical calculations. The Vedic observations could not again be such as need any minute or detailed arithmetical operations. I shall therefore adopt for the present the simplest possible method of calculation,-a method which may be easily understood and followed by any one, who can watch aod observe the stars after the manner of the ancient priests.

We shall assume that the zodiac was divided into 27 parts, not by compass but by means of the leading stars, which Prof. Max Mūller rightly calls the milestones of the heavens. The Vedic priest, who ascertained the motion of the sun by observing with his unaided eye the nearest visible star,* can. not be supposed to have followed a different method in making other celestial observations; and, if so, we cannot assume that he was capable of recognizing and using for the purposes of observation any artificial divisions of the ecliptic on a mathematical principle, such as those which would result from the division of 360° of the zodiac into 27 equal parts, each part thus extending over 13° 20’ of the ecliptic. Of course, such an artificial method might be easily followed in later days, when the means of observation increased and the science of arithmetic was developed.

* Taitt, Br, 1, 5.2. 1, previously quoted. The passage is very important as it describes the method of making celestial observa tions in old times.

But in the earliest days of civilization, it is more natural to suppose that the motions of the sun and the moon were determined by observing which of the koown fixed stars was nearest to them. When we, therefore, find it stated in the Vedic works that the sun was in the Kr̥ttikās, it is more probable that the fixed asterism, and not the beginning of the artificial portion of the zodiac, was intended. I admit that the accuracy of such observations cannot be relied upon within two or three degrees, if not more. But we must take the facts as they are, especially when it is impossible to get anything more accurate from the ancient observers of the heavens.* It will, I trust, however, be found that this inevitable want of accuracy in the old observations does not affect our conclusions to such an extent as to make them practically useless for chronological purposes. For instance, suppose that there is a mistake of 5° in observing the position of the sun with reference to a fixed star when the day and the night are of equal length. This would cause an error of not more than 5 x 72 = 360 years in our calculations; and in the absence of better means there is no reason to be dissatisfied even with such a result, especially when we are dealing with the remotest periods of antiquity. I shall, therefore, assume that references to the Nakṣatras in the old Vedic works, especially in cases where the motions of other bodies are referred to them, are to the fixed asterisms and not to the zodiacal portions.

*Similar observations have been recorded by Greck poets. Homer mentions the turns of the sun, and Hesiod the rising and the setting of the Pleiades at the beginnings of day and night. The observations in the Vedic works may be supposed to have been made in a similar way.

I may also state here that as a change in the position of the vernal equinox necessarily causes a similar change in the position of the winter solstice, both the beginnings of the year, previously referred to, would require to be simultaneously altered. Whenever, therefore, we find a change in the position of the vernal equinox recorded in the early works, we must look for the evidence of a corresponding alteration in the position of the winter solstice, and the corroborative evidence so supplied will naturally add to the strength of our conclusions. This will, I hope, sufficiently explain the procedure I mean to follow in the investigation of the problem before us. I shall now proceed to examine the passages which place the vernal equinox in the Kr̥ttikas, beginning with the latest writer on the subject.

It is now well-known that Varāhamihira, in whose time the vernal equinox coincided with the end of Revati and the summer solstice was in Punaryasū, distinctly refers in two places to the older position of the solstices recorded by writers who preceded him, “When the return of the sun took place from the middle of Ashleṣā," says he in his Pancha Siddhāntika, " the tropic was then right. It now takes place from Punarvasū."*(5)

*See Colebrooke’s Essays, Vol. II., p. 387. The verse may now be fouod ia Dr. Thibaut’s edition of the work. It is as follows: आश्लेषार्धाद् आदीद् यदा निवृत्तिः किलोष्णकिरणस्य। युक्तम् अयनं तदासीत् साम्प्रतम् अयनं पुनर्वसुतः॥ 36

And, again, in the Br̥hat Saṁhitā iii., I and 2, he mentions the same older position of both the solstitial points and appeals to his readers to ascertain for themselves by actual observation which of the two positions of the solstices is the correct one, whether the older position of the solstices or that given by the writer.

Thus

आश्लेषार्धाद् दक्षिणम् उत्तरम् अयनं रवेर् धनिष्ठाद्यम् ।
नूनं कदाचिद् आसीद् येनोक्तं पूर्वशास्त्रेषु॥

साम्प्रतम् अयनं सवितुः कर्कटकाद्यं मृगादितश् चान्यत्।
उक्ताभावो विकृतिः प्रत्यक्ष-परिक्षणैर् व्यक्तिः ॥

It is clear, therefore that in the days of Varāhamihira, there existed works which placed the winter solstice in the beginning of (divisional) Dhanishthā and the summer solstice in the middle of Ashlesha. This statement of Varahamihira is fully corroborated by quotations from Garga 1 and Parashara which we meet with in the works of the later commentators; and it appears that the system of commencing the year with the month of Māgha, which corresponds with the above position of the solstices, was once actually in vogue.

Garga, quoted by Somākara on Ved. Jy. 6, says :
यदा माघस्य शुक्लस्य प्रतिपद्य् उत्तरायणम् ।
सहोदयं श्रविष्ठाभिः सौमार्कौ प्रतिपद्यतः॥

Bhattotpala on Bribat. San, iii, 1, quotes Garga as follows:
श्रविष्ठाद्यात् पौष्णार्धं चरतः शिशिरः।

Amarasiṁha states that the seasons comprise two months each, beginning with Māgha, and three such seasons make an ayana. Amara i. 4.13: द्वौ द्वौ माघादिमासौ स्याद् ऋतुस् तैर् अयनं त्रिभिः। The same arrangement of seasons is also mentioned in the medical works of Sushruta and Vāgbhata. (See Sushruta i. 6, and Vāgbhata’s Ashtāngahridaya Sūtrasthāna iii. 2 ; both of which are quoted further on in Chap. IV. ) The account of the death of Bhishma, related in the Mahabharata Anushāsana-parva 167, further shows that the old warrior, who possessed the superhuman power of choosing his time of death, was waiting on his death bed for the return of the sun towards the north from the winter solstice and that this auspicious event took place in the first half of the month of Magha.* It is evident from this that the winter solstice must have coincided in those days with the beginning of Dhanishtha as described in the Vedānga Jyotiṣa and other works.

Mah. Apu. 167, 26 and 28: परिवृत्तो हि भगवान् सहस्रांशुर् दिवाकरः ॥२६॥
… माघोऽयं समनुप्राप्तो मासः सौम्यो युधिष्ठिर॥ त्रिभागशेषः पक्षोऽयं शुक्लो भवितुम् अर्हति ॥२८॥

Lele, Modak, Ketkar and other Hindu astronomers have recently tried to determine the date of the Mahabharata war from such references, and they hold that the vernal equinox was then in the Krittikas.

There is thus sufficient independent evidence to show that before the Hindus began to make their measurements from the vernal equinox in Revati there existed a system in which the year commenced with the winter solstice in the month of Magha and the vernal equinox was in the last quarter of Bharaṇī or the beginning of the Krittikas. † Prof. Max Muller has pointed out that in the Atharva Veda 1. 19. 7 and in the YAjnavalkya Smriti i. 267, the Kr̥ttikas occupy their early position, while the Vishṇu Purāna actually places the vernal equinox in the Kr̥ttikas. See Pref. to Rig., Vol. IV., p. xxxi.

We need not, therefore, have any doubts about the authenticity of a work which describes this older system and gives rules of preparing a calendar accordingly. Now this is what the Vedānga Jyotiṣa has done. It is a small treatise on the Vedic calendar, and though some of its verses still remain unintelligible, yet we now know enough of the work to ascertain the nature of the calculations given therein. It was once supposed that the treatise mentions the Rāshis, but a further study of the work has shown that though the word Rāshi occurs in some of its verses, it is there used in a totally different sense. This work gives the following positions of the solstices and the equinoxes :- प्रपद्येते श्रविष्ठादौ सूर्याचन्द्रमसावुदक् । सार्पार्धे दक्षिणार्कस्तु माघश्रावणयोः सदा ।।

• 1. The winter solstice in the beginning of Shravishthā, (divisional);
• 2. The verbal equinox in 10° of Bharaṇī;
• 3. The summer solstice in the middle of Ashlesha,
• and 4. The autumnal equinox in 3 20’ of Vishakhā.

The first year of the cycle commenced with the winter solstice when the sun and the moon were together at the beginning of Dhanishtha and the Uttarāyaṇa also began at the same time. There is very little else in the Vedāṅga Jyotiṣa that may help us in our present inquiry except the fact that the enumeration of the deities presiding over the various Nakṣatras begins with Agni, the presiding deity of the Krittikas (agniḥ prajāpatiḥ sōmō & co). From these data astronomers have calculated that the solstitial colure occupied the position above mentioned between 1269 B. C. to 1181 B, C., according as we take the mean rate of the precession of the equinoxes 50 or 48"6 a year. See the late Kr̥shnashāstri Godbole’s Essay on the Antiquity of the Vedas., p. 18; also Pref, to Rig., Vol. IV., p. xxviii.

Some scholars, however, have boldly raised the question, what authority is there to hold that the position of the solstitial colure was recorded in the Vedānga Jyotiṣa from actual observation?(5) It is conceded that the position of the solstitial colure might have been incorporated in the Jyotiṣa from real traditional information, but it is at the same time contended that the language of the treatise and the methods given therein create doubts about the antiquity claimed for the work on the strength of the position of the solstitial points given therein. “I feel bound to remark,” says Prof. Max Mūller, “that unless there was internal evidence that the Vedic hymns reached back to that remote antiquity this passage in the Jyotiṣa would by itself carry no weight whatever.” (* See Pref, to Rig.. Vol. IV., p. xxv, The mention of jau for āśvayujau in the list of symbolic representations of the Nakṣatras in verse 14, leads some support to these doubts. ) The existence of the different versions of the Vedanga Jyotiṣa and the obscurity into which some of its verses are still shrouded render it rather difficult to meet the above objection, especially as it is a side attack on the antiquity of the work with an admission that the position of the colure might have been recorded in the work from real traditions current in the time of its author. It is, however, needless to answer this objection, inasmuch as there is ample confirmatory evidence in the Vedic works themselves which not only bears out the statement in the Vedānga Jyotiṣa, but takes us back into still remoter antiquity.

There are many passages in the Taittirīya saṁhitā, the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa and other works where the Krittikas occupy the first place in the list of the Nakṣatras. († These together with the list, will be found in Pref, to Rig., Vol. IV., p. xxxiv. Ci, Taitt, San, iv., 4. 10; Taitt Br, iii, 1, 1. 6 and j. 5. 1. 2.) In the Taittirīya Brāhmnana (i. 1, 2, 1) it is distinctly stated " one should consecrate the (sacred) fire in the Krittikas; ……the Kr̥ttikās are the mouth of the Nakṣatras. " (* कृतिकास्वग्निमादधीत । …… । मुखं वा एतन्नक्षत्राणां । यस्कृत्तिकाः । ) This shows that the first place given to the Krittikas in the list of the Nakṣatras is not accidental and that we must at Icast suppose that the Krittikas were the “ mouth of the Nakṣatras," in the same way as Vasanta or spring was the “mouth of the seasons " (+ Taitt. Br.i. 1. 2. 6 मुखं वा एतदतूनां यद् वसंतः। ) or the Phālguni full moon the “mouth of the year.” ( Taitt. San. vii. 4.8 quoted infra.)

The phrase is the same in all places and naturally enough it must be similarly interpreted. But granting that the Kr̥ttikās were the mouth of the Nakshatras in the sense that their list always commenced with them, it may be asked what position we are to assign to the Krittikas in the course of the year. There were, as I have previously shown, two beginnings of the year, the winter solstice and the vernal equinox ; which of these two corresponded with the Kr̥ttikās ? Or, are they to be supposed to have coincided with a point altogether different from these two? A little consideration will show that it is not difficult to answer these questions satisfactorily. The present distance between the Krittikas and the summer solstice is more then 30°, and if they ever coincided with the summer solstice it must have been long ago in the present cycle of the precession of the equinoxes. We cannot therefore, interpret the above passage so as to place the summer solstice in the Krittikas, unless we are prepared to take back the composition of the Taittirīya saṁhitā to about 22,000 B. C., and further suppose that all evidence of the intermediate astronomical observations is entirely lost, and the same thing may be said against placing the Kr̥ttikas in the autumnal equinox.* Both the suggestions in my opinion are too extravagant to deserve any consideration. Nor can we assign the beginning of the Nakṣatras to any random point in the ecliptic. There thus remain two possible explanations : viz., that the Kr̥ttikās coincided either with the winter solstice, or with the vernal equinox. Now, considering the fact that the vernal equinox is placed in the last quarter of Bharaṇī in the Vedanga Jyotiṣa it is more natural to presume that the vernal equinox coincided with the Ksittikās at the time when the Taittirīya Saṁhita was compiled. But we need not depend upon probabilities like these, when there are other passages in the Taittirīya saṁhitā and Brāhmaṇa which serve to clearly define the position of the Kr̥ttikās in those days.

* A similar mistake is committed by the late Krishna Shastri Godbole, in his essay on the antiquity of the Vedas, where he supposes Mr̥gaśiras to be in the autumnal equinox. p. 20, 21.

In the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa (i, 5, 2, 7) it is stated that “the Nakṣatras are the houses of gods …. the Nakṣatras of the Devas begin with the Kr̥ttikās and end with Vishākhā, whereas the Nakṣatras of Yama begin with the Anurādhas and end with the Apa-Bharaṇīs."+

दे॒व॒गृ॒हा वै नक्ष॑त्राणि । य ए॒वव्वेँद॑ । गृ॒ह्ये॑व भ॑वति ।

दे॒व॒न॒क्ष॒त्राणि॒ वा अ॒न्यानि॑ ।। 11 ।। य॒म॒न॒क्ष॒त्राण्य् अ॒न्यानि॑ ।
कृत्ति॑काᳶ प्रथ॒मम् । विशा॑खे उत्त॒मम् । तानि॑ देवनक्ष॒त्राणि॑ ।
अ॒नू॒रा॒धाᳶ प्र॑थ॒मम् । अ॒प॒भर॑णीर् उत्त॒मम् । तानि॑ यमनक्ष॒त्राणि॑ ।
यानि॑ देवनक्ष॒त्राणि॑, तानि॒ दक्षि॑णेन॒ परि॑यन्ति ।
यानि॑ यमनक्ष॒त्राणि॑, तान्य् उत्त॑रेण ।

Prof. Max Mūller appears to think that the latter group is called the Nakṣatras of Yama because Yama presides over the last of them (Prep. to Rig. Vol. IV, p. xxxi.). But the explanation appears to me to be quite unsatisfactory; for on the same principle the first group should have been called the Nakṣatras of Indragnī, the presiding deities of Vishākhā, the last in that group. I am, therefore, disposed to think that the principle of division in this case is the same as that followed in the case of the Devayāna and the Pitr̥yāna discussed before. We have the express authority of the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa stating that the sun was to be considered as moving amongst and protecting the Devas, when he turned to the north, in the three seasons of spring, summer and rains. In other words the hemisphere to the north of the equator was supposed to be consecrated to the Devas and the southern one to the Pitr̥s. Now, the sun moved amongst the Devas when he was in the northern hemisphere. The Devas, therefore, must have their abode in that hemisphere, and as the Nakṣatras are said to be the houses of the Devas, all the Nakṣatras in the northern hemisphere, from the vernal to the autumnal equinox, would naturally be called the Nakṣatras of the Devas. Now the southern hemisphere was assigned to the Pitr̥s ; but I have already quoted a passage from the R̥gveda which states that it was the path of the god of death. In Rig. x. 14, 1, Yama is spoken of as the king of Pitr̥s, and in verse 7 of the same hymn the deceased is told to go to the pitr̥-loka, where he would meet the god Yama. In the Vājasaneyi Saṁhitā 19, 45, salutation is made to the world of Pitr̥s in the kingdom of Yama. There are many other passages of similar import in the saṁhitās,* and from all these it would be quilc clear that the Pitr̥yada or Pitr̥-loka was also called the kingdom of Yama. The Nakṣatras in the southern hemisphere, therefore, came to be designated as the Nak. shatras of Yama in opposition to the Nakṣatras of the • Cl. Taitt. San. vii. 3, 14, gita faga Tran Aguera (scil.) | Also sec Athar, Ved, xviii. 4.

Devas, thus dividing the whole circle of stars in two equal groups. This also explains why Yama is made to preside over the Apa-Bharaṇīs. It was at the Apa-Bharaṇīs that the zodiac was divided, the Kr̥ttikās going over into the Devas’ and the Apa-Bharaṇīs turning down into the Yama’s portion of the celestial hemisphere. The Taittirīya Brah maṇa further states that the Nakṣatras of the Devas move towards the south while the Nakṣatras of Yama move towards the north. The words dakshina ( south ) and uttara (north) are in the instrumental case, and doubts have been entertained as to their exact meaning. But if we accept the statement in the śatapatha Brāhmaṇa about the abode of the Devas, no other meaning is posible except that the Nakṣatras of the Devas were counted from the vernal to the autumnal equinox, that is, to the point where the south (southern hemisphere) begins, and conversely in case of the Nakṣatras of Yama, I may here mention that the movements of both the groups are described in the Brāhmaṇa in the present tense (pari.yanti ), and that we may, therefore, suppose them to be recorded from actual observation. If chis explanation of che division of the Nakṣatras into the Nakshtras of gods and those of Yama is correct and I think it is it at once fixes the position of the Kr̥ttikās at the beginning of the Devayāna or the vernal equinox at the time when these Vedic works were compiled. * May not apa-Bbaraufs have been su namcd from this circum. atance? Bharaṇī appears to be an older name, changed afterwards into Apa-Bharaṇī, in the same manner, Mula into Mula-barhani, and Jyeshr̥nd into Jyeshthaghni. Perhaps the description of Apa Bharaṇī in Taitt, Br i, 5, 1, may be so understood. It says:.. Fraport: 1 *7$a: CTFUIT I W atstat! There is another and still more important passage in the Taittirīya Saṁhitā which supplies further confirmatory evi. dence on the same point. In the Taittirīya saṁhitā vii. 4,8, we have a discussion as to the time best suited for the com mencement of the Satras like the gavan-ayana which last for one whole year and as the passage is important in various ways I shall give it here in the original : संवत्सराय दीक्षिष्यमाणाएकाष्टकायां दीक्षरभेषा वै सैवरसुरस्य पत्नी यदेकाष्टकैतस्यां पाएपएसा रात्रि वसति साक्षादेव सैवरसरमारम्भ वसंतभात वाएते सैवरसरस्यामिदीक्षते गएकाष्टकायां दीक्षतेतनामा मातु भवतोव्यस्तं वाएते संवत्सरस्यामिवीक्षते एकाष्टकायां दीक्ष तनामानातू भवतः फल्गुनीपूर्णमासे दीक्षरन्मुखं वाएतत् संवत्सर बफल्गुनीपूर्णमासो मुखतपुष संवत्सरमारभ्य दीक्षते . तस्यैव नियों पत्साम्मध्ये विषूवानसंपते चिनापूर्णमासे दीक्षेन्मुखं वाएतत्संवत्सरस्व वचित्रापूर्णमासो मुखतएव संवत्सरमारभ्य दीक्षते तस्य न काचन नियों भवति चतुरहे पुरस्तात्पौर्णमास्यै दक्षिरन्तेषामकाष्टकायां क्रयः सैपयते तेनैकाष्टका न छंबट्कुति तेषां पूर्वपक्षे सुत्या संपद्यते पूर्व पक्ष मासाअभिसंपते से पूर्वपक्ष उत्तिष्ठति तानुत्तिष्ठतओषधयो वनस्पत. घोत्तिष्कृति तान्कल्याणी कीतिरत्तिष्टत्यरारसुरिमे यजमानाइति तदनुस रानुवति। In the Tandya Brāhmaṇa (v. 9) we have the same pas sage with a few additions and alterations, and as this has been quoted by the commentators I shall give it here for comparison:– एकाएकायां दीक्षरन् ॥१॥ एंपा के संवत्सरस्य पक्षी यदेकाष्टकैतस्यां बाएतार रात्रि वसति • साक्षादेव सत्संवत्सरमारम्प दीक्षत ॥ २ ॥

तस्प सा निर्या पदपोऽनभिनंदतोऽभ्यवति ॥३॥ विच्छि वाएते संवत्सरस्वामिदीक्षते पएकाष्टकायां दीक्षतेऽतनामामा वृतू भवतः ॥४॥ भाते पाएते संवत्सरस्यामिदीक्षते येऽतनामानावृतू अभिदीक्षते ॥५॥ तस्मादेवाष्टकायां न दीक्ष्यम् ॥ ६॥ फाल्गुने दीक्षरन् ॥ ७॥ मुखं पाएतत्संवत्सरस्य परफागुनो मुखतएव तत् संवत्सरमारभ्य दीक्षते ॥ ८॥ • तस्य सा निर्या यस्सम्मेधे विषुवान् संपद्यते ॥ ९ ॥ चित्रापूर्णमासे दीक्षेरन् ॥ १०॥ चक्षुवाएतत् संवत्सरस्य यश्चित्रापूर्णमासो मुखतो वै चक्षुर्मुखतएव तत् संवत्सरमारभ्य दीक्षंने तस्य न निर्यास्ति ॥१॥ चतुरहे पुरस्तात् पौर्णमास्या दीक्षरन् ॥१२॥ तेषामेकाष्टकायां क्रयः संपद्यते तेनैकाष्टकां न संवट् कुर्वति ॥ १३॥ तेषां पूर्वपक्षे सुस्या संपद्यते पूर्वपक्षे मासा: संतिष्ठमाना यति पूर्वपक्षेउत्तिष्ठति तानुत्तिष्ठतः पशवः औषधयोऽत्तिष्ठति सान्कल्याणी वागभिवदस्यरात्सुरिमे सत्रिणइति राभवंति ॥१४॥ The third siitra in the above gives an additional reason for rejecting the Ekashtakā ; while in the fourth sitra vich. hinnam is substituted for vyastam of the Taittirīya Saṁhitā. Another important change is, that the word Phalguni-purna. māsa is paraphrased by Phalguni in the 8th sūtra, thus clearly showing that the former was then understood to mean the full-moon night. Both the passages are similar in other respects.

Fortunately for us Sāyaṇācharya is not our only guide in the interpretation of these important passages. It is probably the only passage (the two passages being similar I treat them as one) in the Vedas where the commencement of the annual satra is given and from the ritualistic point of view it has formed the subject of a learned discussion amongst the Mimānsakas. Jaimini in his Mīmānsa-darshana Chap. vi. Sect. 5 has devoted an Adhikarana (10th) to the interpretation of this passage, and the subject has been thoroughly discussed by Shabara, Kumārila, Pārthasarathi Khaṇdadeva and other writers on Mīmānsa. We have thus a continuous tradition about the meaning of this passage current amongst the Indian divipesma tradition based not upon mere authority, but on the logically solid rules of exegetics propounded in the work of Jaimini. I shall first give a literal translation of the passage from the Taittirīya Sanhitii and then discuss its interpretation as bearing on the present question. “Those who are about to consecrate themselves for the year (sacrifice) should do so on the Ekashtakā (day). The Ekāshtaki is the wife of the year; and he [i. t., the year] lives in her [1. e., the Ekāshtaka] for that night. (Therefore they) practically sacrifice (by) beginning the year. Those that sacrifice on the Ekashtakii, sacrifice to the distressed (period) of the year. It is the season (dual) whose name comes last. Those, that sacrifice on the Ekashtakā, sacrifice * The Tandya Brabmaṇa, (Sitra 3 in the above passage) adds a third reason thus :-* They go to avabhritha [i. the final bath] aot delighted with water,” Shabara and other conimentators op Jaimini bave poticed this additional ground for rejecting the Ekāshtaka.

to the reversed* (period) of the year. It is the season (dual whose name comes last. They should consecrate themselves for the sacrifice on the Phalguni full moon. The Phalgunī full-moon is the mouth of the year. They sacrifice (by) beginning the year from the very mouth. It has only one fault, viz., that the Viṣūvān [i.e., the equator or the central day] falls in the rains. They should consecrate themselves for the sacrifice on the Chitrā full-moon, The Chitra full-snoon is the mouth of the year. They sacrifice (by) beginning the year from the very mouth. It has no faulu whatsoever. They should consecrate themselves for the sacrifice four days before the full-moon. Their Kraya [i.e., the purchase of soma) falls on the Ekāshtaka. Thereby they do not render the Ekashtakā void [ie., of no conse quence]. Their Suiya [i.e., the extraction of soma juice] fails in the first [z.e., the bright] half of the month). Their months [i.eu, the monthly sacrifices] fall in the first half. They rise (r.e., finish their sacrifice] in the first half. On their rising, herbs and plants rise after them. After them rises the good fame that these sacrifices have prospered. Thereon all prosper.” Here in the beginning we are told that the Ekashtakā is the day to commence the Satra, which lasts for one year. But the word Ekashtakā is used to denote the eighth day of the latter (dark) half of the four months of Hemanta and Shishira seasons,t and sometimes it means the eighth day of the * According to the Tūndya Brāhmaṇa “brokea” or “destroyed.”

• Cf. Ashy, Gri. Sutra ii. 4, 1; Rāalalang mga HTA CATAT: dark half of each of the twelve months of the year.* The statement in the following sentences that this Ekashtaka is liable to the objection of occurring in the cold or the last season does, however, at opce narrow the field of our choice. It must be further borde in mind that the Ekashtaka, here spoken of, is the wife of the year, and is contrasted with the Phalguni and Chitrā full-moons ; while tradition in the time of Jaimini and āpastamba interpreted it to mean the 8th day of the dark half of Māgha. All writers on Mimansā therefore take this kikāshtakā to mean the 8th day of the dark half of Magha. As the Ekashtaka is the wife of the yeart and as the god of the year is said to reside with her on that night, those that commence their sacrifice on that Ekashtaka may practically be supposed to commence it at the beginning of the year which resides there. In other words the Ekashtakā is thus a constructive beginning of the year, and therefore the yearly sacrifice may be commenced on that day. But the passage now proceeds to point out the objections to the commencing of the sacrifice on the Ekishtakā day. The 8th day of Māgha falls during the distressed period of the year, that is, c.ccording to Shabara and other commentators the period . Cf, Tandya Brāhmaṇa x. 3, 11, E61: IEITHTUTE: Sayağa in his commentary on Tja, Br. v. 9, observes that Ekashtaka is there used in its secondary sease and quotes Apastamba Grinya Sutra (viii. 21, 10) thus:- ar at T ATEAT Toledg5 TEACHI Aqua I askarai Thus both Jaimini and Apastamba considered · Ekashtaka to mean the 8th day of the dark halt of Magha. +Bhabar on Jaimini vi, 5, 35, quotes Atharva Veda iii, 10, 12; and Sāyaṇa in his Comm. on Taitt, San, vii. 4, 8, cites, Atharva Veda iii, 10, 12, and Taitt. San. iv. 3, 11, 3. But these texts simply state that the Ekāshtaka is the wite of the year, without defining the Ekāshtaka.

when people are distressed by cold." The word in the text is arta which literally means " distressed,’ but Sayaħa takes it to denote the end or destruction of the year, implying thereby that the old year is then brought to an end and that the consecration for the yearly satra, which must be made before the beginning of the new year, or, in other words, not alter the previous year is ended or destroyed, cannot be made at this time. Though Shabara and Siyaṇa thus give different interpretations of arta, practically both agree in holding that in those days the old year ended before the eighth day of the dark half of Magha; for Shabara distinctly states that the word " reversed" used further on means “reversed on account of the change of ayana."’t Sacrificing during the distressed period of the year is thus the first objection to commencing the satra on the Ekāshtakā day. The second objection is that it is the last season, that is, though you may be said to sacrifice to the constructive beginning of the year. yet as far as the seasons are concerned you sacrifice in the last of them. The word for season, situ, has been used in the text in the dual number and it might be urged that it denotes two seasons. A reference to the Taittirīya Saphite iv. 4-11, 1. will, however, show that the word situ is there used in dual, probably because each season comprises two months, I just as “scissors” is used in plural in English grai afAmie aia emat: 1*:, stala vonat woman Shabara on Jaim. vi 5. 37. Sayaṇi ara Alam i RTER t wuagh aftrud FTP h 1 Shabara on Jaimini vi 6. 31. Skyana in his comm. on Taitt. San, says Rewafafurarerfirem दीक्षते । आदौ हिदीक्षा कतम्या । भयं संवत्सरस्पतिः काकः। AYH AVEN ardfaci Upon this passage the author of KAIR. Madhava observes a THTRIRIH at Cal. Rd.. p. A similar passage also occurs in the Vājasaneyi saṁhitā (13.26) and Mahīdhara while commenting on it expressly states that the dual there has the meaning of the singular number.” The “last named seasons (dual)” therefore simply means “the last season.” It must be here mentioned that according to the passage in the Taṇdya Brāhmaṇa, which Shabara appears to quote, the first objection is thus stated :-_ aot delighted with water they go to avabhritha [i. e., the final bath).” This is but an amplification of the objection on the ground of the “last season" and Khandadeva expressly says that water is then undelightful “on account of cold.” The Tandya Brihmaṇa does not omit the objection of the " last season ;’’ but simply expands and illustrates the same by referring to the natural dislike for a cold bath in that season. We may, therefore, regard this objection more as explaining the first than as an additional one. We now come to the third objection, viz., those that commence the sacrifice on the Ekashtaka day sacrifice to the reversed period of the year. * Reversed’, vyasta in the original, is said by Shabara to indicate the change of ayana caused by the turning away of the sun from the winter solstice,t and Sāyaṇa seems to under stand it in the same way. Thus although those that com mence the satra on the 8th day of the dark half of Magha may be supposed to do so practically at the beginning of the year, the husband of the Ekāshtakā, yet the procedure is triply objectionable, inasmuch as they sacrifice in the cold season, in the last of seasons (when water is undelightful and when the year is reversed or upset by the turning away of the sun from the winter solstice. • fequindi + See Shabara quoted in the second aote on the last page.

To get over this threefold objection an alternative is next proposed. The Phalguni full-moon day was known to be the first day of the year. If you commence your sacrifice on that day, you avoid the three objections pre viously noted and still secure your object of sacrificing at the beginning or the mouth of the year. But even this course is not faultless; because if you commence on the Phalguns full-moon the middle or the central day of the satra falls in the rainy season, which again is not a desirable time. The first twelve days of a satra are taken up in the consecration and twelve more in upusads after which the regular satra sacrifices commence. So the middle day of the satra falls after six inonths and twenly-four days from the Phalgunī full-moon, that is, on the ninth of the bright half of the month of Ashvina" Now if we suppose the winter solstice or the beginning of the cold season to fall on the Migha full moon, the summer solstice, or the end of the summer and the beginning of the rainy season, would fall a little after the full-moon in Shravana. The months of Bhādrapada and Ashvina therefore represented the rainy season in those days, and the occurrence of the Viṣūvān in Ashvina or the rainy season was not believed lo be auspicious. As the next alternative it is, therefore, suggested that the consecration should take place on the Chitrā full.moon, and this course is said to be open to no objection whatsoever. But even this is given up for a still better time, and it is finally stated that persous desirous of consecrating them. selves for the satra should do so“ four days before the full moon." The full-moon here mentioned is not, however, * This, in substance, is Siyana’s explanation in his commentary on this passage. specifically defined, and consequently it forms the subject of one of the Jaimini’s Adhikaranas.* As no specific full moon is mentioned it may mean either any full moon-day, or the Chitra full moon which is mentioned next before in the same passage, or it may refer to the Magha full moon as the Ekāshtakā is mentioned immediately afterwards in connection with it. Jaimini decides that it is the full moon in the month of Magha, for it is stated immediately after, that those who commence the sacrifice on this full-moon will purchase their Soma on the Ekāshtaka. This Ekishtakā can evidently be no other than the one mentioned in the begin ning of the passage, and the object of the arrangement last suggested is to utilise somehow or other the important day of the Ekāshtakā, which was at first recommended for the commencement of the sacrifice itself, but which had to be given up on account of the three-fold objection stated above. The full moon musi, therefore, be the one next preceding this Ekashtaka. Again the full moon day is said to be such that when the sacrifice is finished the herbs and the plants spring up, which, as remarked by Shabara, can happen only in the Vasanta season. Jaimini vi. 5, 30.37. Jaimini’s dutras which I have here tried to translate and explain are as follows:-1. qidalanma qaisie dua;2.aliāadigan tuia; 3. 1941e8iwā:: 4. sparseils ta; 5 a wfugiga ital; 6. 1919918 981; 7, Tina ugatga; 8. what a Rima, sayaqa in his Jaimini nyaya. main vistars and in his comm. on the Tritt. San. fully adopts this view. But in his comm, on the Tagdya Brihmaga, v 9. 12 (Cal, Bd.) he is represented as saying that the full moon last mentioned refers to the Chaitri! S mc one, either the seribe the prioter, or the publisher, das here obviously committed an error,

To sum up ; the last mentioned full-moon, though not specifically defined, must be prior to the Vasanta season and also the next previous to the Ekiṣtaka, which is the wife of the year and which falls in the cold season, in the last season, i e.. Shishira (or when water is not delightful] and after the sun has passed through the winter solstice. It must also be remembered that the Phalguni and the Chilrā full-moon are to be excluded. Jaimini, therefore, concludes that this full moon cannot be any other than the one falling in the month of Migha, and his conclusion has been adopted by all the Mima asakus. We can now under. sland why Laug:ikṣi, quoted by Somikara, stales that “they sacrifice to the year four days before the full-moon in Maghn.’’ If Jainini’s interpretation of this passage is correct, we may, so far as our present inquiry is concerned, deduce the following conclusions from it :-(1) That in the days of the Taittirīya saṁhitā the winter solstice occurred before the eighth day of the dark half of Migha, which again was a month of the cold season. Whether the solsticial day fell on the Magha full-moon is not so certain, though it inay be taken as fairly implied. For the Ekashtaka was abandoned because it occurred in the” reversed " peric) of the year, and it is qnite natural to suppose that the priests in choosing a second day would try to remove as many of the objections Lo the Ekāshtakā as they could. In other words, they would not select a day in the “reversed” period of the year, nor one in the last season. The fact that a day before the full moou in Magha was selected is, therefore, a clear indication of the solstice occurring on that day, while their anxiety * #17: GlobareTiNUTE: gitaraTATIO igati to utilise the Ekashtaka fully accounts for the selection of the fourth in preference to any other day before the full maon. I may also remark that throughout the whole passage the intention of sacrificing at the beginning (real, constructive, or traditional) of the year is quite clear. The full-moon-in Magha must, therefore, have been one of such beginnings. (2) That the year then commenced with the winter solstice. (3) That as there cannot be three real beginnings of the year al an interval of one month each, the passage must be understood as recording a tradition about the Chitrā full moon and the Phalgupi fullmoon being once considered as the first days of the year. (4) That Viṣuvān had lost its primary meaning and that it fell in the rainy season if the sacrifice was commenced on the Phalguni full-moon. The passage thus supplies not only confirmatory, but direct evidence of the coincidence of the Ksittikas with the vernal equinox in the days of the Taittirīya saṁhitā. For, if the winter solstice fell on the full-moon day in Māgha, then the summer solstice, where the moon must then be, must coincide with the asterism of Maghā, and counting seven Nakṣatras backwards we get the vernal equinox in the Kr̥ttikas. Independently of the Vedānga Jyot.sha we thus have four different statements in the Taittirīya saṁhitā aod Brāhmaṇa clearly showing that the verbal equinox was then in the Kr̥ttikās : firstly, the lists of the Nakṣatras and their presiding deities, given in the Taittirīya Saphitā and Brāhmaṇa, all begioning with the Kr̥ttikās ; secondly, an express statement in the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa, that the Kritiikās are the mouth of the Nakṣatras ; thirdly, a statement that the Kr̥tlikās are the first of the Deva · Nakshatras, that is, as I have shown before, the Nakṣatras in the northern hemisphere above the vernal equinox ; and fourthly, the passage in the Taittirīya Sanhitil above dis cussed, which expressly states that the winter solstice fell in the month of Magha. The vernal equinox is referred to the Krittikas directly or indirectly in all these passages and I do not think that any more confirmatory evidence from the Vedic works is required to establish the proposition that the Kr̥ttikās coincided with the verbal equinox, when the Taittirīya Saṁhitā was compiled. As an additional proof I may, however, mention the fact, that Pitr̥s are said to be the presiding deities of Māgha in the Taittirīya Saṁhitā ive 4. 10. 1. With the Krittikas in the vernal equinox Magha is the summer solstice and as the Dakshiṇāyana or the ayana of the Pitr̥s commenced at this point, the asterism which happened to be there at that time was naturally assigned to the Pitpis. The position for all the other cardinal points of the ecliptic can be thus shown to be consistent with the position of the verbal equinox in the Kr̥ttikas.

Supposing the Kritiikas to denote the asterism of that name this gives us, according to Prof. Whitney’s* calculation, 3360 B. C. as the probable time for the compilation of the Taittirīya saṁhitā. Some scholars unwilling to carry the antiquity of the work to such a remote period, have urged, without assigning any special reason, that by Krittikas we must here understand the beginning of the zodiacal portion of that name. Now as the position of the asterism of the Kriitikās in its zodiacal portion is 100 50’ from the beginning, t these scholars would place the vernal equinox • See Sūrya Siddhānta Add. gotes, p. 323. | This is the position given in the Sūrya Siddbāota viii. 28. See the table prepared by Prof. Whitney in bis notes to this pagsage ikas.

about 110 behind the asterism of the Krittikas and thus reduce the antiquity of the Saṁhitā nearly by 11x7% -792 years or to about 1496 B. C. I have briefly slated before my reasons for discarding this supposition and holding that the pames of the Nakṣatras in the early Vedic days must be taken to denote the asterisins known by such names. If Indian priests are to be supposed incapable of making any accurate observations of solstitial points in 1200 B 0,+ it is to my miod ulterly inconsistent and illogical to hold that the forefathers of these priests, when they assigned the vernal equinox to the Krittikas, understood the word 10 nean not the asterism but the imaginary beginning of the zodiacal portion of that name. I cannot also understand vby scholars should hesitate to assign the Vedic works to the same period of antiquity which they allow to the Chinese and the Egyptians. I But it is needless here to enter into this controversy. For if I once succeed in showing, as I hope to do that there is sufficient internal evidence in the Vedic literature itself of a still remoter antiquity, all theories, conjectures, and guesses, which have the effect of unduly reducing the antiquity of the Vedic works and also of throw. ing discredit upon the claims of the Indians to the origin of the Nakṣatra system, will require no refutation. * This is Bentley’s date about wbich see infra. + See Pret. to Rig., vol IV., p. xxix. M. Biot allows it in the case of the Chinese anit considers that the Hindus borrowed the Nakehatra system from them. Albtrunt, in his chronology of ancient nations, &c., observes that other nations begin their asteriams with the Pleiades. He further states that he bas found in some books of Hermes that the veraal quiaox coincide with the rising of the Pleiades, but, says hc “God kaows best whl they intend 1”

Bentley, however, takes his stand on a different ground. He suggests that the word Vishakhi, like Vidala,.. may mean “ possessed of two branches," and that these two branches may have been caused by the equinoctial colure bisecting the zodiacal portion of the Vishākhās. Now the equinoctial colure passing through the beginning of the divisional Ksittikas naturally bisects the zodiacal portion of Vishakhā. Bentley, therefore, concludes, without any more proof than this elymological conjecture, that this was the position of the colure when Vishakhā received its name. This is no doubt an ingenious hypothesis. But there is not only no evidence in the Vedic works to support such etymological speculation, but it may be easily shown to be inconsistent with the position of the winter solstice in the day of the Taittirīya saṁhitā. I have already stated that from the passage of the Tait Liriya Sanhild just quoted we may fairly infer that the winter solstice occurred in those days on the full moon in Māgha Accordiug to the Vedanga Jyotiṣa it fell a fort. night earlier, that is, on the first day of the bright half of Magha. It is roughly estimated that the equinox must recede about two divisional Nakṣatras, i e., 26° 40’, to make the seasons fall back by one month. Between the times of the Tailliriya saṁhitā and the Vedānga Jyotiṣa the equinox must accordingly recede 13° 20’ or nearly 14o. Now the position of the equinox as given in the Vedānga Jyotiṣa is 10° of Bharapi. From this to the beginning of the divi. sional Ksittikas, the distance is only go 20’, while if we measure it from the asterism of Krittiki it is 30 20’ + 100 • This example has been added by Prof. Max Mūller. See Prel. to Rig., Vol. IV. p. XXX. See also Bentley’s Historical view of Hindu Astronomy, p. 2. -140 10. Therefore during the period that lapsed between the Taittirīya Saphita and the Vedānga Jyotiṣa the equinox, according to Bentley, receded only 30 20’; while if we understand the Kšiltikās to denote the asterism of that Dame, it gives us a precession of 140 10. Now as the winter solstice fell a fortnight later in the days of the Saṁhitā we must accept the latter precession of 100, which alone corresponds with that interval of time (i, e. a fortnight) and assume that the vernal equinox then coincided with the asterism of Krittikā, a conclusion the probability of which has already been established on other grounds. Bentley’s speculation must, therefore, be rejected, upless we are prepared to allow his guess about the primary meaning of Vishākhā 10 prevail against reasonable conclusions based upon a passage from the Taittirīya Saphitā. But even admitting Bentley’s speculation about the meaning of Vishākhā, we may fairly question the soundness of the conclusion drawn therefrom. For whal ground is there for holding that the two divisions of Vishākhā must be mathematically equal in every respect? The word dala in vidala may be so understood; but dala and shakhd are got similar in this respect. Bentley’s error, therefore, con. sisls not in supposing that the colure may have cut the divisional Vishākās, but in inferring therefrom that it must have bisected it. The whole ecliptic was divided into 27 Nakṣatras, and 13} could only be comprised in cach hemisphere. Vishakhā, the 14th Nakṣatra from the Kr̥llikās, may have been thus considered, by simply counting the number of the Nakṣatras, as lying partly in the region of the Devas and partly in that of the Pitpis." * This is enough to satisfy a merely etymological speculation U i supported by any other evidence whatsoever. Speaking moro

For though we might hold that the Vedic observers were not provided with means to fix imaginary points in the heavens and to refer to these points the motions of the heavenly bodies as astronomers do at present, yet it does not imply that they were unaware of the approximate dis tances between the various asterisms selected by them. In other words, they might be supposed to have roughly known the distances between the stars, though for obvious reasons they could not but refer the motions of the heavenly bodies only to the fixed stars. Thus understood, Bentley’s conjecture about the primary meading of Vishākhā does not necessarily imply that the equinoctial colure bisected the divisional Vishākhās in those days; and when the conjecture itself does not thus support “his theory about the position of the colure, I do not think we shall be justified in accepting it, especially when it is shown that it is also objectionable on other grounds. I am, therefore, disposed to fix the date of the Taittirīya Saphicā at 2300 B.O., and not 1426 B. C. as Bentley has done. accurately if the vernal equinox coincided with the asterism of the Krittikas, the equipoctial colure falls out of the divisiopal Visbikas by 40, but it is nearly 60 behind the asterism of Anuradbā. Of these two aatcriams Vishākhā would therefore be nearer to the colure. But we might as well ask what ground there is for holding that the Nakṣatra divisions of the Zodiac, at the time when the vera al equinox was in the Krittikas (supposing such divisions to have then existed), were the same as those which we now use and which com. mence with Revati. Beatley appears to have altogether overlooked this objection, I have already stated my view regarding the exist. ance of the divisional Nakṣatras in old times, and I would reject Bentley’s etymological speculation on the mere ground that it requires us to assume the existence of such divisional Nakṣatras and their bisection by colures. So far, we have been going over the ground more or less traversed before by several scholars. But it may be asked if we have here reached the Ultima Thule of the Vedic antiquity. Does the oldest hymn, the first utterance of the Aryan mind, reach back thus far and no further? Was it such a hymn that the Brahma-rādins of old and Pāṇiai several centuries before Christ believed and declared as “seen “? In what follows, I propose to bring together such eridence from the Vedic works as would enable us to deal with these questions. I have already drawn attention to the fact that the Ohitra and the Phaiguni full-moon are mentioned as the mouths or the beginnings of the year in the passage from the Taittirīya saṁhitā last quoted and discussed. In the next chapter I shall endeavour to show how these state meats are to be interpreted, how far they are corroborated by other evidence and what conclusions we may deduce therefrom.